Google Play return policy

[thejoker.]

Google's online site has the policy in which for you to return a faulty device you need to first give them permission to put an 'authorisation' on the value of the replacement device they send to you. This is non-optional.

 

The idea that if the faulty device you return is not deemed under warranty by them they will take the authorised value and you keep the replacement they sent you. I.e you pay for same product twice whether you like it or not.

 

Am I being completely wrong in believing this go against Sales of Good Act?

 

Thanks

[BazzaS]

Google's online site has the policy in which for you to return a faulty device you need to first give them permission to put an 'authorisation' on the value of the replacement device they send to you. This is non-optional.

 

The idea that if the faulty device you return is not deemed under warranty by them they will take the authorised value and you keep the replacement they sent you. I.e you pay for same product twice whether you like it or not.

 

Am I being completely wrong in believing this go against Sales of Good Act?

 

Thanks

 

If they place an authorisation rather than a charge, it sounds more to me like they are protecting themselves against people getting a "replacement" item sent and the original never getting returned.

From their point of view this would allow them to have 2 charges, for 2 items.

 

Are you sure this isn't their intent? Can you post a link to the relevant T's & C's?

 

Alternatively, tell them you want to return the faulty one, and only once they have it back you'll call in for them to send the replacement?

[thejoker.]

support.google.com/googleplay/answer/3061475?hl=en

 

//play.google.com/intl/en_uk/about/device-terms.html

 

Can't post live links.

 

Yes, it would make sense that they want to put some kind of lien on your account to cover the second device. That would be fine even useful for many, if, and only if, they also allowed you to return a faulty device without receiving a replacement, apparently they have confirmed this is not possible. Their last email was effectively 'Our way or deal with the manufacturer'

 

My issue is I don't and can't really afford to risk another £200, even if the risk is small that they won't deem it under warranty. There is also the risk that the item won't make it to them/they lose it.

 

Surely such a policy can't be in keeping with consumer legislation? it is putting an unreasonable barrier in front of one exercising their statutory rights.

[ericsbrother]

then you have the fallback of a recharge but that takes time as well if they argue about it (banks should refund and them debit your account again if you are telling porkies) but will get round stupid automated systems.